There are people who also believed that Pastagate was a prank or an "exaggeration." Only once French Quebecers understand that these things actually do happen on a day-to-day basis that any positive change will be made in La Belle Province.

The "pastagate" incident did unfortunately occur! I am not playing the Ostrich here. I wrote to the Biodome when I was made aware of the Beaverton prank in order to find out if there was any truth to it. And THERE IS NONE. Some might argue with either the fact Quebekers want to protect their language in a 98% English-speaking continent or question their methods of doing it. But to invent false news just to throw mud at an entire society is something I will not condone.

Many restaurants have English only menus, yes. But in Quebec that's only the case when there are French-only menus available too. Instead of having a hissy fit, the guy who got the "English-only" menu could have simply asked for a French menu. Problem solved.

Then I suggest you visit http://www.putbacktheflag.com/, a grassroots organisation of 30,000 people now who can attest how non-francophones are treated in Quebec: refusal of public services, physical attacks, etc.

The parrot story is indeed satire, as this article already says, but truth underlies it enough to make it satire in the first place.

And before you start claiming "but look at how the French are treated in the other Canadian provinces" I'll add this: Two wrongs don't make one right.

Pointing to the blog of a known (ex?) politician who militantly fought for the separation of Quebec at the federal government level does not support your own lack of bias here.

I'm a Quebecer, have been all my life, and my language of choice is French. But the OQLF is definitely a sign of how badly political parties can screw up when they start thinking they can enforce what language you will speak, "or else".

I would recommend that tourists stay out of Quebec these days, unless they're ready to face confrontations over the fact that they don't speak French in public, and willing to see services refused to them.

It's not that they don't use them. It's just that they were given an English menu by mistake. Had these two yokels simply asked for a French menu, they would have been brought one in under a minute. No, instead they decided to file a complaint with the OQLF. What kind of a society do we live in where people feel the need to file official complaints about that?

That a staunch Quebecois is an international ignoramus is well established. The only way to drive some sense into them is hurt them where it counts - commerce and jobs. If businesses left Quebec and shunned going there in the first place, may be, the Quebecois will learn a lesson.

The official bilingualism inflicted on Canada by Pierre Trudeau (a Quebecois) was the biggest misfortune to befell Canada. With the result, Canadians pay more for everything and get less of it.

Instead of Quebec separating from Canada, which Quebec keeps threatening to gain disproportionate favors from the federal government, the rest of Canada should petition to kick Quebec out. As a "have-not" province, it will whither on the wine. Let the Quebecois drink from that wine then.

The simple facts are as more francophone’s get hired for all government positions less and less English speakers are working for their own governments across the country. Don’t believe me; Go check the stats for yourself. Francophone’s are grossly over-represented in all levels of government including hospitals, law, policing...etc. No fairness, no representation by population. They call it bilingualism, yet the term is never defined on purpose and believe me it doesn’t mean fluency in 2 languages in Canada, at least to the French it doesn’t. No political party will speak for the English speaking majority in this province and/or country. Practical bilingualism, where numbers warrant… is never defined on purpose. In Ontario, and New Brunswick it now means segregation. Nice eh? The French (they are actually metis, a mixed race, a mongrel, a mutt…not french) are demanding French only facilities all over the province, not bilingual, French only. $ Bilingualism is really nothing more then a hiring quota for francophone’s and that is a fact…just ask yourself, why are francophone’s over-represented in all government jobs and how come more and more positions are being designated bilingual all the time? And just as important, how come they are NOT fluently bilingual? Some can barely speak English!

That is exactly the type of comment that made me understand why Québec needs language laws. The imperialist mindset, not to mention the intolerance and the arrogance that Québec has to deal with explains why it needs weapons in its fight to protect its identity.

They've picked up offices of quite a few French multinationals (Vivendi and Ubisoft come to mind first, only because I work in media). The gaps will be filled by other French companies looking for a foothold in North America. I don't have a strong opinion either way, just an observation of a potential, unintended consequence.

Sir,
My mother tongue is Spanish, so I ask you: why are you writing "francophone's" instead of "francophones"?

The French speakers of Quebec are indeed not French, but then you go on to call them metis, which is something else within the Canadian context, mixed race, whatever that means to you (is it French-Indian? French-English? and what are you? and: is that bad?) and then "mongrel" and "mutt", which has a rather negative, racist connotation.

"The only way to drive some sense into them is hurt them where it counts: commerce and jobs." We, Flemings in Belgium thought the same thing. But instead the french speaking denizens of Belgium suffer from an unemployment rate that in 40 years has never been lower than 14%, and of the working class, 38% works for the government. The people from the north of Francs learn a bit Dutch and then drive 60-80 km each day to get a job in Dutch-speaking Flanders, while the nearby french-belgian communities have an unemployment rate of 25% and refuse to speak Dutch, a language they despise, because, well, it's not french. Bilingualism does not work with the french. Just let them separate and they can be pompous about an iron tower built in another french country, pretending they are a part thereof. One thing you're lucky of though: in contrast to the french-belgians, the canadian-french do not steal land from you.

In contrast, Flanders refuses to give _any_ linguistic rights to French-speakers, except in a limited number of localities that have constitutionally mandated language rights, and even those are much more limited than those that exist for English Quebeckers. And you have to consider that in Belgium you are actually dealing with local majorities, whereas in Québec Anglos are in the minority everywhere, except in a couple of Montréal neighbourhoods. Even these very limited rights for French-speakers are considered a provocation and actively fought and hollowed out by the Flemish government.

Steal land from you? I own land in the periphery and I don't remember slaughtering the previous owner to get my hands on it.

And let me ask you this: why don't you secede from us? Could it be that without Brussels your economy would crumble? Or is that the richest places in Flanders are actually French-majority? Or perhaps because you have been dominating this country for over half a century and doing very well indeed? Do me a favour, stop complaining and put your money where your mouth is, I would be DELIGHTED if Flanders seceded from Belgium.

The richest places are actually French majority? Are you kidding me? More then 300.000 Flemmings commute daily to Brussels to do their jobs, mostly because the French Belgians do not fit the profile for the multilingual jobs in Brussels.
And when I talk about stealing land, I am talking about the language border that keeps constantly shifting to the north, about the communities that you inhabit, are unemployed in, keep on speaking French, refuse to speak the language of the majority, and then call it french-speaking and demand to move the language border to the north, in your favor. That my friend, is stealing land. Being aided by the federal government who is in majority, french speaking. That's right, in contrast to your obvious lies, the minority of the country has the majority of the federal government. In contrast to what you say, it is the Flemmings that need language laws to protect themselves from the uni-lingual french.

Obviously, we don't live in the same reality and moreover someone needs to explain to you what private property and civil rights are. I'm not going to refute every point you raise though, because it doesn't interest anybody.
My question is very simple, and you haven't answered it: if the poor Flemings are so mistreated, why haven't they seceded - although they keep on threatening to do so?

Aren't you the minority? Normally minorities secede. But the minority has a veto in Belgium, so it will take a while.
Somebody needs to explain you the difference between private property rights and public law.
You're also contradicting yourself. If you would can't stand living with us, why do you choose to buy a house in Flanders? So you buy a house where the majority speaks another language and then you start complaining? Strange. I suggest that you start complaining in Québec, whenever you see an English word. It must be morally difficult for you to write English.

I actually inherited the place. It's in the Brussels periphery (not in Flanders, that's further away) and all our neighbours are French-speakers.

As you can see moreover, I have no problem with English. What I do have a problem with is that you seem not to want to answer my question: if Flemings are treated so badly in Belgium (where they are a majority, which gives an idea of the logistical difficulties of treating them badly and hence of the truth of your statements) why don't they secede? I'll answer the question for you: because you're having your cake and eating it. Also because you know you would be worse off without Brussels and the periphery, which are French-speaking and would never willingly join you.

I can answer _your_ question though, even though it's not particularly agreeable. The reasons why there still isn't a majority of French-speakers in favour of secession are the following:

*because people do not take Flemish nationalism seriously and think/hope it'll all blow over, in other words because they prefer to put their head in the sand and wave the Belgian flag
*because many Walloons, demoralized by their economic difficulties, believe the incessant and pernicious racist Flemish propaganda that depaints them as Untermenschen and parasites and don't dare to take their fate in their own hands
*because when you live in Dinant, you have little contact with the aggressive anti-francophone policies that the Flemish government specializes in and you tend not to care
*because the PS is happy to gather ever more power through ever expanding devolution, even though there is no devolution in areas that would not benefit Flanders
*because devolution in Belgium favours the PS electorally to the detriment of the francophone right-wing
*because the PS needs Flemish money to stay in power, as it is based on clientelism - every treason it commits is rewarded by the Flemish with a paltry bribe
*because we are not a very nationalistic people and although that is rather a good thing in general, in this particular circumstance it is a weakness

So the PQ was successfull because the percentage of Englsh speaking population in Quebec fell from 13% to 7%...which is closer to the percentage of French speaking population in Ontario (4%) or Lousiana (4%)

I hope Mr. Menard really does represent a growing awareness of just how anachronistic, draconian and absurd Quebec's language laws really are. Bill 101 remains a source of tension in Canada not because the rest of Canada wants Quebec to become more English, but because the law denies basic freedoms of speech and expression.

I think I was pretty clear the first time. Operations of 54 large companies in Quebec are exempt from language laws but restaurant owners who have 'pasta' on their menu are required to comply to the letter.

The Canadian translation market is reckoned to be worth over US$3 billion per year (10% of the world market) paid mainly from official sources primarily for English/French. The result is that Canada has the most expensive, least efficient and most protected translation industry in the world.

Canadian companies need to translate from English into Spanish to export to the USA. The result, they either pay through the nose to local suppliers or hire highly over paid US agencies.

Whatever the arguments might be for retaining French, free market forces do not seem to apply.

In their emotional desire to paint all things Gallic, the effects are starting to show; Tourism in Montreal is off noticeably, but the Quebec Government can't figure out why. Business can, but they don't want to wade into the language debate.
A new Bill (Bill 14) before Quebec's National Assembly will give the language cops the right to enter any business establishment without notice and allow them access to any part of the premises. They will have the right to seize materials (one would assume it could be a computer..) deemed in contravention and lastly, on their word alone, the "Office de la Langue Francais" can send you a fine without any judicial procedure.
Still, we haven't reached the point where it requires a S.W.A.T. team to enforce things, but Canada is usually ten years behind the States, so it shouldn't be too long...

More than 80 % of Québec population native language is French. It's always been at least 80 % for 400 hundred years.
94.4 % of Québec population knows French fluently.
Perhaps the small monolingual minority - that's been here for generations - should relax a bit and learn the only official language of the province.

Finally! Someone with a sense of humor. OK Paulo, you can move here..(now if the Office de la Langue had its way, they'd insist upon a translation for LOL...
BDR? [beaucoup de rires].
Seriously, its a great place to live and one of the fun things is talking to people in French for five minutes before you realize you both speak English. The offshoot of all this is the bilingual people have the World at their fingertips. I guess one could equate that to elitism but, what the F--K; you can't please everybody! BDR

Wrong again, Canada Libre. You forgot to add the 500,000 - 600,000 people who left Quebec between 1976 and today, thanks to your racist language laws, written by the fascist psychiatrist Dr. Camille Laurin.

CanadianAsJuly1 : « people who left Quebec .. thanks to ..language laws »

If those people left because they would not accept that the government protected the linguistics rights of the >80% native French speaking populations and because they refused to speak the language, doesn't that prove that they were racists ??

It's "Office québecoiS de la langue française", not "québecoise". Moreover, I would like to know if the Economist has checked this story and if is really representative.

I've met too many English Canadians who would in fact just like to get rid of French in Québec ("it's much simpler if everybody speaks English") and read too many snarling and misleading articles in the English-speaking press about language laws in Québec not to be slightly skeptical about what I read here.

No, it is not representative. A walk around Quebec City will show just how much English signage there is out there. And a majority of the population have no problem with it. But I can understand how a francophone might resent having to work in a foreign language. It is an uncomfortable thing to do and, before la revolution tranquille it must also have been humiliating.
However, as in Catalonia and elsewhere, language is a useful tool for nationalists to encourage populist xenophobia. In Quebec, the historic influence of the Catholic church, which wanted to shield its (francophone) adherents from protestant (anglophone) influence has resulted in a culture which, although it is now free of all that, continues with a - to my eye - paranoid obsession with language. The price paid by the anglophone population is high, but the francophones also pay a price.
(Incidentally, I wish the terms "English Canadians" and "French Canadians" were retired. Most of the original anglophone settlers in Quebec were British, including large groups of Scots and Irish. They were followed by American Empire Loyalists and all sorts from Europe and around the world. Only a small minority were English. And many of the descendants of the original French settlers assimilated into anglophone communities, just as many descendants of anglophone settlers have assimilated into francophone communities. Describing Canadians (and/or Quebeckers) as either anglophone or francophone would be much clearer as well as being more accurate.)

You're dreaming. You also haven't traveled very much. Sorry, Quebec is the most racist part of Canada, and it's right up there with the most racist parts of North America. Only the xenophobia of the Tea Party can compete with the xenophobia of the separatists.

Some German multi-nationals have chosen to make English their official working language, even in Germany. One hopes that they do not have a branch in Quebec, where such a move would be illegal. And to think some governments actually compete FOR investment dollars, rather than doing their best to discourage it. In the years since the PQ was first elected, Montreal has stagnated while Toronto has boomed. Back in the mid '70s, Montreal was the business capital of Canada. No more. Quebec continues its decades long quest to become an economic and cultural backwater.

A cultural backwater because in a continent with 325 million English Speakers, 70 million Spanish Speakers, and less than 10 million French speakers, the French only law serves as a source of cultural protectionism that inhibits the interchange of ideas. Fortress Quebec will never amount to much. The Quebecois, freed to interact with the world as they see fit, are as capable of great things as any other people.

The Québécois are already free to interact with the world and are more bilingual and trilingual than any other place in the Americas. The French language also creates cultural and commercial links with France, fast-growing West Africa and dozens of other regions in the world. Getting rid of French is the proposed solution of Anglo-Supremacists like you; it is nothing more than cultural genocide, a pure loss for humanity in the name of homogeneity.

Hey Ohio,
It appears to me that the number of Spanish-speakers in the Americas that you mention is inaccurate. There are around 320 million Spanish-speakers in this continent. Only Mexico has like 100 million of inhabitants that use Spanish as their every day language (do not consider the remaining 10% that still speak in a native language).
Cheers

No, a cultural backwater because their "leaders" teach them that a unilingual ghetto is best for them.

It's funny how much bilingualism you find in separatist leaders, compared to the enforced unilingualism forced on the majority. Teenagers in Scandinavia are bilingual and trilingual - your average French-Canadian in Montreal has been suckered by a school system driven by the ghetto-minded separatists.

Unlike Ontario Regulation 17 who forbided teaching french in school ( english is compulsory in QC schools). Unlike Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta who also forbided french...Of course, Anglos destroy minorities for their own good and out of the goodness of their heart...

If you want to talk about the 19th and early 20th centuries, perhaps you can also talk about the rampant fascism in the nationalist and separatist movement in Quebec? Or the fears expressed by American diplomats in 1942 about the extent of fascism in Quebec?

Fascist sympathy? You mean Mackenzie King following his FDR crony and refusing to recognize the Free French? MK trying to prevent Admiral LeMesurier from retaking St-Pierre-et-Miquelon from the Vichy government? MK refusing to take jewish refugees ("None is too many"). MK favoring the immigration of german officers for enlistment into the RCMP?

I think you are confused. You mean when the Government of Canada finally admitted Jewish refugees and Holocaust survivors after the war, Quebec nationalists screamed no Jews.
And you are a hypocrite, since the strongest supporters of the anti-refugee policy were ... Quebec nationalists.
And the strongest opponents of the Free French (and friends of Vichy) were ... Quebec nationalists.
And you really don't want to go into the separatist/nationalist conspiracy to smuggle Vichy war criminals into Canada ... a scheme thwarted by Ottawa.
And you really don't want to know for how many years after World War II fascism was common among your great separatist heroes.

It's great when the media reports on actual news like when British Columbia and the Supreme Court of Canada are tag-teaming to deny basic linguistic rights to francophones (even granted to poor oppressed anglos in QC). Note that this was reported in neither of the two largest English language national newspapers in Canada.http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/supreme-court-rules-against-tabling-frenc...

Jean Charest anglo submissive? only in the deranged mind of a radical separatist! Look at their voting record, every time the issue of Quebec as-a-nation and french-speaking rights come up the Provincial Assembly votes unanimously.

He is correct in that if Canada is divisible so is Quebec. Any reasonable person one can see the symmetry in the situation. Only a person obfuscated by french nationalism couldn't see than.

"But he's not submissive to the anglo-federation, no ... of course"

Ah, so now we get to the truth. In your view the Federation is anglo, even though it was bilingual from day one, and most of the "changes" implemented by the bilingual commission simply took us back to what was promised in the BNA act.

It is of course quite possible to support the Federation without being anglo submissive. In fact according to polls, the vast majority of Quebec supports the Federation, as attested by the various referenda. So you just called 70%+ of your fellow Quebecois who support the federation "anglo submissive".

No wonder the PQ is a minority government even after Charest's disastrous last period.

environmentalist : "Yes that he was, which makes him pro-Canadian, not anglo-submissive"
Someone who serves the anglo-imperialists domination upon my people is anglo-submissive, by definition.
I see that you think in newspeak terms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak). Like youthink that there are Canadians and Québécois in this country. Aren't you ?
You just forget that there was Canada and Canadien people for 150 years before any anglo ever came in here. Your leaders should have finished exterminating us before stealing our name !!
Hence, in Canada there are CanadiEns, Natives, Acadiens and .. I call the rest anglos ..

Except that said "anglo domination" of your people exists only in your imagination. The fact that your nation project is based in fiction doesn't seem to bother you? And before the Anglos there were no Canadians. There was French North America so if you want to go back to French submissive and rejoin France you are welcome to it, just don't be surprised when your fellow Quebecois laugh you all the way in the polls like they have done time and time again.

Parizeau got it wrong, it wasn't the "l'argent et des votes ethniques " that killed the dream. It was your fellow Quebecois who went to the polls, under a misleading question, and said "no thanks!". That is if you care about the facts, but somehow I have a feeling you don't.

Oh grow up! Typical Quebecois separatist that when logic goes against them they act all offended and pout like a five year old.

Nobody is denigrated when logic and facts show that Quebec is divisible. If you cannot deal with facts maybe your ideology needs some fine tuning.

"Only if you are an anglo"

There you go calling the majority of Quebecois anglo submissive. You aren't too bright are you?

"After the newspeak here comes the propaganda. No poll ever question the real Canadiens about the support to the anglo-imperialist federation because no one cares to know the answer (imposed federation, remember ?) "

Now we are entering into real tin foil territory. The polls are out there, to be found if you spend five seconds searching for them.

"For the Referendums, the two from Québec were about separation, not about submission. You can not take a NO for a YES because a NO does not say what it is one really wants as a YES does."

Charest was campaigning in that referendum and you called him anglo submissive for it. You are not even self consistent, but it doesn't surprise me. No one who is rational and attuned to the facts as they are today could wish for separation. Either they live in they past when French Quebecois were oppressed by the French speaking Catholic church in cahoots with the Westmount elite or they have bought in all the propaganda from the PQ where a perfectly symmetric separation of Quebec is "denigration".

And mark my words, if Quebec ever separates the eastern townships and a big portion of the native lands is coming back with the rest of Canada. The fact that this shakes you so much shows how little thought you have given to your pipe dream.

Since we are in the subject let me remind you that Parizeau's own economic study predicted dire economic consequences for Quebec if it chose to separate. What was the "logical" answer from the separatists? pout and declare their own study "economic terrorism".

"The majority of all Québec population as voted OUI to separate - dump out - from anglo-canada already. It's just the cheating that made the NO win."

Call me back when you ask a straight question "do you want to separate? yes or no"

There was no bigger cheat in the referendum than asking a dishonest question. And the reason why such a question was chosen is because Parizeau's own polling reported that a straight up or down question (which was preferable for international support) would consistently lose by a wide margin. Even this misleading, dishonest question could only garnish support in the low 30%s which is what forced Lucien Bouchard to step in and use his amazing oratory to push the vote close to 50%

Lastly the Charlottetown agreement was not "Federation yes/no?". It was "this agreement signed behind closed doors by the most unpopular prime minister yes/no?". Every one said no English and French, not so much because what it said, but because the manner in it was reached.

Lastly, I'll say it one more time, there has *never* been a time when separation was favored by the majority of Quebecois according to polls from all sides. That is a fact.

environmentalist : « Call me back when you ask a straight question "do you want to separate? yes or no" »

Hold on until your despotic state finally asks for the people consent to the federation, the charter and the constitution, like any respectable democratic state must do, before you give lessons to other perfectly democratic movements.

So I was wrong when I said that people were asked about the confederation. It means that your country never ever consulted the populations about its constitution or its charter of rights or its confederation.

environmentalist : « You were wrong there and with everything else. »
That is a fallacious inference. Should I conclude that you are always fallacious ?
By saying the Canadien people was consulted *once* about the anglo-kenaydieune federation, I was knowingly being too generous about that. You have rejected that effort to be nice. My mistake, really.
Now I know you better.

environmentalist : « I said "there has *never* been a time when separation was favored by the majority". The chart **you** linked to has separation peaking at 48% after Meech. »
You are obsessed with focusing exclusively on the things that please you and I am have no reason to follow you in that.

Thanks for proving to us that you are a racist. You mean the majority of the pure laine voted for the separatists. Minorities voted 95% no.

So what you are saying is that the minorities are not true Quebecers. Yes you really are a racist.

And don't give us that BS about fraud - the biggest frauds were on the separatist side. Like Chomedy riding where more than 8,000 legally cast NO votes were declared invalid by crooked vote counters hired by the separatist side. I was there - I saw the dirty tricks played by the separatists during the advance polls and during referendum night itself.

And remember that the St Jean Baptiste Society sends out volunteers to hunt for "violations" of the racist language laws. The great majority of complaints were laid by fewer than 10 people working for the St Jean Baptiste Society.

2. A Google search on Wellarc would have also thrown up WELARC, which stands for the Winnipeg English Language Assessment and Referral Centre. A bureaucrat might reasonably conclude that the two names are so similar that they could lead to confusion. Since Mr Ménard claims that one of the "l"s in Wellarc stands for "langue" and Welarc also relates to language, the confusion would be compounded.

I really really really hate to defend Law 101 and its implementation, but I suspect there is less to this story than meets the eye. Mr Ménard is obviously a bright and ambitious young man and I wish him well, though.

Actually, this happened to my partner, 9-10 years ago when he was told that his business would be closed, accounts frozen if he does not change his business' name (already 'approved' 3 years back by the same oqlf) because it sounded too english, although it was a made up word. It's also worth noting that my partner's clients were exclusively from Ontario. This harassment happens all-too-often and it drives people out of Qc, including us.

No, French is not a lost cause; the Anglophones (as we are called) who have remained in Quebec have, over the past three decades, righted a cultural wrong. We have increased the amount of French taught in our English schools, most of us are bilingual and we pride ourselves, living in the best of two worlds, (America with a touch of Europe) on our ability to live in such a warm and friendly place and to interact in two languages.
That a few Separatists can cause such turmoil is nothing new; as the old saying goes: "The squeaky wheel..."
Keeping a language alive is not done through legislation, as this article demonstrates; it is pride in ones culture that keeps a language alive.
Case in point: The Jews, without the protection of any law (let alone their neighbors, in many instances) or government has been able to keep their culture alive and vibrant, through centuries of repression and through one of the most organized campaigns of annihilation since Genghiz Khan.
French will survive, because we like it.

"Case in point: The Jews, without the protection of any law (let alone their neighbors, in many instances) or government has been able to keep their culture alive and vibrant, "

A unique Jewish culture existed throughout the centuries largely *because* of laws and governmental policies. In Europe Jews were legally second-class citizens, living in restricted areas, participating in restricted professions, and wearing specific clothing until Napoleon's time (and even later further East). A lot of the lifting of these legal restrictions led to cultural assimilation.

Then of course there is the state of Israel, which seems to be the very definition of state support for a cultural group.

Of course, much "unique Jewish culture" does survive without legal or governmental support, but we're talking about extreme groups like the Haredim and Hasidim.

So yes, governments alone cannot keep a language alive (and can often hurt language use when done wrongly), but they definitely do provide the framework in which a language's use grows and prospers.

You have brought up a good point. I think it is the apathy of honest, hard working people that allows those that govern to step outside of legal boundaries. The ensuing lack of reaction simply emboldens them. In the meantime, the Looney Tunes, like starved hyenas, come out of the darkness to spew hatred and discord without any restrictions to the simple ABC's; like facts, for instance.
The aforementioned, hard-working people are not to blame, they don't read the Economist, nor are they likely to participate in any of the forums broaching social issues; for they, even when made aware, prefer not to make trouble. They are like a sleeping giant, either they awaken and make themselves heard with one, great voice, or they realize too late that they've been had and find themselves ensnared in a layer of cobwebs too thick to break free of.
You have seen the same thing in the U.S., post 9/11. Luckily, we are still arguing about language on signs and don't have "Fatherland Security" to deal with yet...

True, but it's definitely trying to set the tone for the article. It's interesting that the satirical story ends up taking a whole paragraph of the five paragraph post.

It's like if you started an article about the Vatican by noting that they were conducting damage control after the Pope's remarks yesterday, to then note that in fact you were actually referring to an article in The Onion (this actually exists). If your news consists of a heavy dose of satirical news, then how much real news are you actually discussing?

If Canada wants to drop a quarter of its population and its landmass, sure.

I don't have any problems at all with bilingualism. French Canadians are a historic and significant minority and they deserve to be governed in their own language. Denying this natural right in short-sighted Anglophone supremacism will only play right into the separatist propaganda, who are, as the article demonstrates, not much better than fascists.

No-one is suggesting that French-speaking Quebeckers should not be able to use French and be governed in French if they so wish. All that we are asking is that English-speaking Quebeckers should have an equal right to use English, which currently they don't have.

And most minorities in Europe can only dream of the language rights afforded to Quebec in Canada, yet that doesn't seem to stop the separatists from asking for more, so why should it stop the anglos from asking for what its fair?

If Québec hadn't been "afforded language rights", it would have seceded and you would probably be just another part of the US. Québec fought for its identity, and there was really nothing gracious in its belated recognition by the rest of Canada.
There is a lot to criticise in Québec nationalism, but some context is useful. Part of that context is that so many Anglo-Canadians despise and hate Québec and would like nothing better than its disappearance, even today. Tough luck, because "ils se souviennent" and they're fighters.

I don't watch PQ propaganda, but I've spoken with a fair number of English Canadians, and I've always been struck with their narrow-mindedness in language matters, although they would be very surprised to be called that since they are persuaded they only argue for "diversity", seemingly a code word for being just like any other immigrant and assimilating into the Anglo majority. Quebeckers aren't immigrants and they are not going to assimilate.

You are talking to the wrong people. Just like you are in the minority of Quebecois by supporting separation (most don't), there are also anglos in the minority which resent french rights. Those are too in the minority.

This was something the brain washed Quebecois were surprised to learn when over a hundred thousand of Canadians trekked to Montreal to ask Quebec to stay in the Federation in what was (and still is) the largest rally ever in Canada. Until then they believed incorrectly, as you do, that anglos are anti-Quebec. As a group they are not. Just like as a group the Quebecois are happy in the federation.

« [just before the 1995 referendum,] the brain washed Quebecois were surprised to learn when over a hundred thousand of Canadians trekked to Montreal to ask Quebec to stay in the Federation »

You really live is some fantasy wonderland of propaganda.

Those who came for the « Love-In » were between 300 and 400 000. They were in fact coming to Montréal TO VOTE IN OUR REFERENDUM on the next day (remember that the NO won by 52 000). Those anglos from other provinces were given work days off, free bus/train/plane tickets, free accommodation etc. all paid for by the federal gov't, gov't controlled VIA Rail, gov't controlled Air Canada, government ministry employees, etc.

Just that accounted at least for 400% of all the expense allowed by Québec law for the complete referendum campaign.

You are assuming too much. I am not a Quebecker but a French-speaker from Brussels and I do not support (or oppose for that matter) Québec separatism. I'm only trying to make the two following points. Reporting on Québec language laws in the Anglo-saxon press always stresses ridiculous cases - and whenever you have a rule, you will have ridiculous cases. It is also curiously context-free, the context being that there are a lot of Anglo-canadians who would gladly have continued the anti-Québec policies of the past and resent Quebeckers for refusing to assimilate in the Anglo majority, which is why the language laws are indispensable to the survival of Québec as a French-speaking nation.

Please answer the question: what rights do you have as a French-speaker in British Columbia that an English-speaker does not have in Québec, and vice-versa? The fact that English-speakers have left Québec is irrelevant, and could just as well be the result of their refusal to "embrace diversity" when that diversity does not express itself in English.

" language laws are indispensable to the survival of Québec as a French-speaking nation."

That is a common belief in Quebec, but not borne by the facts. French in Quebec survived 300 years without language laws so no, laws are not needed to guarantee its survival, certainly not the draconian laws in place right now.

In fact, French has never been in danger in Quebec. The issue of separation was motivated by economic discrimination against French speakers, discrimination which is mostly gone and thus making separation a moot point. So the PQ came up with this completely bogus "French needs to be defended" when in fact it has never been healthier and in less need of defense.

"Are English-speakers in Québec treated worse than French-speakers in British Columbia?"

Of course they are. Outside Quebec if you want your kid to go to a French school all you need to do is swear that you speak French at home. However you could have lived your entire life in an English speaking country, be a native English speaker and be denied English schooling for your kids if you happen to have attend a school where French was the language of instruction.

"If Québec didn't have language rights it would have seceded from Canada."

You have to read the history rather than the official story (from either side) which is full of myths. The main demands on the ground from the separatist side were (1) end to economic discrimination and (2) equal status of French within the Federation (status that was already enshrined in the BNA act but was not enforced in practice).

Those demands were met mostly by Trudeau, with work beginning during Pearson and finishing under Mulroney. It has never been about "language rights" within Quebec, which as I said above has never been in danger in Quebec.

Not 'worse', just differently. Everything in Canada - road signs, shop signs, federal and provincial government paperwork,commercial products have to be in English and French, except in Quebec where everything is French only. French-speakers in anglophone Canada have their needs catered for; English-speaking Quebeckers do not.Whether they think that is 'worse' treatment is not up to me.

Sorry but you have your information wrong.
Provincial paperwork in Quebec has too be both in English and French as by law, you have a right to have judicial and governmental services in English and in French.
That's for the province of Quebec. Now if you look at the other provinces, you will see many other provinces have no such requirements in their laws and indeed offer their judicial and provincial government services in English only. Even recently, the federal government declared that internal papers would no longer be translated to French.
If French-speakers in Anglophone Canada have their needs catered for, why is it that a British-Columbia court ruled that French-Speakers had no right to French judicial services this month? Why did a Ontario French-speaking mother was forced to speak English to her child because the court appointed child-visit supervisor could not speak French? Such things would be impossible by law for English-speakers in Quebec. Not so in the rest of Canada.

"Most minorities in Europe" - what have you been smoking? You haven't traveled very much, I take it.

In fact, the worst oppression of linguistic minorities in Europe has always been in France, especially under the hero of Quebec separatists, Charles de Gaulle. Ask the people in Brittany or Alsace what they think of French government language policy. Amazing that the separatists have always kissed the rear of de Gaulle, and never gave a sh*t about minorities in France.

I know my city. There weren't 200 000 people. As for the bussing in, there are enough testimonies to that.
In 1980, I worked for the federalist side. I was a political attaché for the Québec Liberals. Until I was sent to work in the Montreal West Island where I learned to hide my name to avoid abuse from constituents in the riding office...and being told that "If you're rich enough to have an American Express card, you're rich enough to speak english."

Yes, yes, yes, "hundreds of thousands" voted. A total lie. It never happened.

"40,000 immigrants instructed to vote NO" - a lie. First of all, the so-called rush of immigrants never happened. Secondly, immigrants and minorities vote NO because they see hatred from separatists like you.

So wrap your head around that and explain to us why minorities in Quebec vote NO to the separatists.

"Illegal spending by the feds" - now what about illegal spending by the separatists.

Citizenship Court judges from across Canada were sent into the province to work overtime to ensure as many qualified immigrants living in Quebec as possible had Canadian citizenship before the referendum, and thus were able to vote. The goal was to have 10,000 to 20,000 outstanding citizenship applications processed for residents of Quebec by mid-October. As well, the federal government also halved the time needed to process certificates for those who had lost their citizenship. »»

«« Statistics compiled by Citizenship and Immigration Canada show that some 43,855 new Quebecers obtained their Canadian citizenship during 1995. About one quarter of these (11,429) were granted their citizenship during the month of October [just days before the referendum]. The data also shows an increase in certificate issuances by 87% between 1993 and 1995. The year 1996 saw a drop of 39%. »»

CanadianAsJuly1 : « , "hundreds of thousands" voted. A total lie. It never happened. »

«« Electoral list

In 1998, PQ activists from the Montreal region brought a list of 100,000 names before the DGEQ. According to them, the 100,000 voters were registered on the electoral list for the 1995 referendum but were not registered with the Régie de l'Assurance-Maladie du Québec (RAMQ), the Quebec public health insurer. After exhaustive verifications, the DGEQ found that 56,000 out of the 100,000 did not have the right to vote and should be removed from the list in the future.

The same year, PQ activists from the Eastern Townships region also brought a case of referendum fraud before the DGEQ. As a result of the inquiry, 32 international students studying at Bishop's University in Lennoxville were fined after being found guilty of voting illegally in 1995.

In response, the Quebec government later changed the Electoral Act so that voters would need to show a Canadian passport, Quebec drivers' license or RAMQ card at the polling station for identification purposes in future elections. »»

And you still can't explain the 8,000 votes stolen in Chomedy riding by crooked vote counters, to say nothing of similar antics in other anglophone ridings.

1.82% spoiled in 1995? At a time when people were trying very hard to do the right thing. More than a few commentators pointed out that if you separatists had just pushed the Chomedy model a bit harder, you would have cheated enough to win.

And for the rest of your comments, I now understand where the Tea Party got their platform from. Because the Tea Party attacks on minority voters in the US sound just like your attacks on minority voters in Quebec. Same "logic", almost exactly the same language. And for the same reason: minorities don't vote for the Tea Party in the US, and minorities don't vote for the separatists in Quebec.

Now I see you still haven't explained why minorities in Quebec vote NO to the separatists. Hint: maybe because we know you for the racists that you are.

«« an inquiry into the alleged irregularities. Under the supervision of Alan B. Gold, Chief Justice of the Quebec Superior Court, all ballots of the three ridings plus a sample of ballots from 34 other ridings were examined.
.. It found that the scrutineers had committed no illegal acts, and the rejected ballots were not rejected in a fraudulent or irregular manner by the scrutineers. »»

1) Remember the vote counters were hired by the separatist government.

2) It didn't matter that the No vote was dominant in those ridings, since it was the total vote for all of Quebec that mattered. So by stealing votes in Federalist ridings, the separatists could reduce the overall No vote.

«« an inquiry into the alleged irregularities. Under the supervision of Alan B. Gold, Chief Justice of the Quebec Superior Court, all ballots of the three ridings plus a sample of ballots from 34 other ridings were examined.

.. It found that the scrutineers had committed no illegal acts, and the rejected ballots were not rejected in a fraudulent or irregular manner by the scrutineers. »»

«« After the referendum, the Chief Electoral Officer of Quebec, Pierre F. Côté, filed 20 criminal charges of illegal expenditures by Option Canada and others on behalf of the "No" side, which were dropped after the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that parts of the referendum law were too restrictive on third-party spending. »»

It took the federal PM nominated supreme court judges to pull the NO side out of shit ..

.. an estimated 100,000 Canadians from all provinces of Canada were gathered at the Place du Canada for what was called the "Unity Rally".

Aurèle Gervais, communications director for the Liberal Party of Canada, as well as the students' association at Ottawa's Algonquin College, were charged with infractions of Quebec's Election Act after the referendum for illegally hiring buses to bring supporters to Montreal for the rally, .. much of the spending on the rally was illegal because it was not authorized by the "No" Committee or entered in its expenditure report.

.. former federal minister Brian Tobin, chief organizer for the rally, told .. that various Canadian corporations had helped to fund the initiative. Two days prior to the rally, Canadian Airlines had announced its "Unity fare: up to 90% discounts for people who want to purchase tickets from anywhere in Canada"... six different Canadian transport companies, including Air Canada, Canadian Airlines and Via Rail, .. fine for money illegally spent transporting people to Montreal. »»

You lack more logic than usual. You made an outrageous accusation that 100,000 people from outside Quebec voted illegally ... a complete falsehood. It is not up to me to prove you wrong. It is up to you to prove yourself right. And separatist propaganda doesn't work. Do you really think that 100,000 non-registered voters could have shown up on Referendum Day and voted, and nobody noticed?

No, it was only in the fevered imagination of the separatist racists, looking for excuses for their loss, and blaming minorities. It all started with the racist, drunken speech by Jacques Parizeau.

But again you show that you are every bit as racist as the American Tea Party. They too whine about immigrants and minorities "stealing" elections when the fault is all their's. And the Tea Party's voter suppression tactics in the US sound like they learned them from the separatists.

Sorry old boy. Once again - it is up to you to prove something. You claim to have "evidence" of a major crime, but you have none.
And how on earth did they "vote" if they were not registered?
Show me some evidence outside your separatist propaganda.
Basic rule of logic. Yes, I know that separatists are not ruled by logic, but here's a basic rule of logic: it is up to you to prove a fact. It is not up to me to disprove it.
And the perpetual racism of the separatists against minorities speaks for itself. I see you have not explained why minorities in Quebec vote NO to the separatists.

The lowest estimate at the time, put out by a pro-separatist news organization at the time was 30K. Then you come here and argue it wasn't even 15K. Here's some advice: put down the Kool Aid and take the next bus back to reality. Then we can talk.

When I hear racism, I call the speaker a racist. I've provided you with plenty of facts. Too bad you are blinded by generations of ignorance and historical revisionism.
So tell us: if English Canada is so bad, how come the Jews are entirely against the separatist movement ... to the extent that separatists regularly insult the Jewish community for being anti-separatist.
And in your answer you can tell us what you know about the racism against Montreal's francophone Jewish minority shown by the francophone majority. And if you want to prove your ignorance once more, go right ahead.

@CanadianAsJuly1 - That's truly comic! When any Quebecker tries to assert a fact, it's a lie but when you mistate a fact or overstate a number that's a truth. You are so much of bad faith (as some others participants is this debate) that I am stopping to read all this nonsense right now!

- Massacres of the Natives and the Metis (Pontiac, Batoche, Louis Riel.. ), parking of the survivors in concentration camps (reservations), internment of generations of their children in forced assimilation institutions, starvation for medical experimentations, etc.

- Each and every peace treaties broken.

- Imposed federation of all territories and provinces under one centralized power.

- Anti-French apartheid all over the non-Québec Canada for more than a century to eradicate French speaking majority populations.

- Real Canadians (the French) forced into the status of "white ne88ers" – all their main living condition indicators under anglo-imperialist domination equal or worse than those of the blacks in USA -. Yet the native’s conditions were even worse than those.

- More than half of real Canadiens forced into permanent exile in order to survive while the governments were heavily sponsoring targeted immigration from Western Europe.

- Imposed charter of rights and constitutions designed specifically to make it impossible for the real Canadiens to protect their language and their culture.

- State terrorism to fake separatist groups (FLQ) ; federal police putting bombs in Montréal, publication of false communiqués, anglo-army occupation of Montréal in 1970, hundreds of people jailed for months with no charge against them, etc. All of that in order to destroy the peaceful and democratic Québec independence movements.

- Criminal activities against Québec regulations to win the two referendum votes on Québec sovereignty.

- Instrumentalization of the ethnics (Parizeau was so frigging right ! )

Montreal Jews can be Jews and second-class or francophones Jews and third-class.The choice is easy.
Here at Laval University , there is a Pollack Pavillion given in the 60's by Québec City richest Jewish businessman to celebrate his children being accepted here ( McGill had a quota on Jews, catholic universities did not.) At Université de Montréal, the Bronfman pais a pavillion, the Saidye Bronfman Theatre.
The reverse blood libel ( falsely accusing someone of antisemitism) is like Godwin's Law. It disqualifies you from commenting.

I teach college. Both in French and English. My english class has 5 students. My french one has 40. My girlgriend teach primary school to a class of 4 anglos. Show me a town in any anglo province where you can get a college class for 4 franco students. And stop bleating about Quebec Anglos not having equal rights. It doesn't even rise to the level of trolling.

McGill has its Bronfman Building, and McGill also has a Pollack Hall. So the wealth was spread around

And Catholic universities had a quota ... look up the case in 1934 when a single Jewish intern was appointed at Notre Dame Hospital ... and the interns at Notre Dame and four other French Catholic hospitals went on strike. Five hospitals on strike, and they didn't go back to work until a single Jewish intern had resigned.

Go ahead and deny Quebec's very long and ugly history of anti-Semitism, involving Quebec's greatest nationalist and separatist heroes. It only confirms that you are living in an imaginary world.

When you say "Parizeau was right" you only confirm your own racism. So you say that minorities don't have a democratic right to their opinion and votes? You think that minorities are somehow "instruments" of Ottawa?
I guess it's easier for you to live in your dreamland than to actually consider why it is that ethnics and minorities vote NO to the separatists. Answer: because we recognize that separatists are racists.
For bonus marks in your reply
1) Explain why the Natives also vote for Canada, not for the separatists
2) Explain the billboard that appeared on the Kahnawake Mohawk Territory during the Oka Crisis: "We're Iroquois, not Québecois".

Tell that to people subject to raids by the Language Police, or subject to nit-picking by school inspectors.
You see, Quebec separatists are just as racist as the American Tea Party: hatred for minorities, attempted suppression of minority votes, demand for a single-language state, hatred for any show of second languages. The Tea Party must have learned from you.
In fact, explain why Quebec allows bridges to fall down and has a serious shortage of doctors (thanks to deliberate separatist policies) ... but they increased the budget for the Language Police.

« 1) Explain why the Natives also vote for Canada, not for the separatists »
.
Nobody as ever vote for Canada because Canada has always been imposed without population's consent.
.
.
2) Explain the billboard that appeared on the Kahnawake Mohawk Territory during the Oka Crisis: "We're Iroquois, not Québecois".
.
That did not say « we are Canadians » either. ..

So would you like to comment on the hatred against Mohawks during the Oka Crisis?

And do get a more original statement than the separatist whine that "Canada has always been imposed without population's consent". Get serious: multiple Federal elections, four (4) French-Canadian Prime Ministers, French-Canadians who fought for Canada during World War II while their leaders were supporting the fascists; two referenda in which Quebec said "no". How much more do you need.

European countries liberated by Canada's forces in World War II certainly understand that.

That's plenty of legitimacy. Perhaps you prefer the unilateral "legitimacy" that separatists with 32% of the popular vote were demanding?

So a building in McGill prove the Anglo were nice guys ( "None is too many" and "Christians only" ?) and a buiding at Laval proves that we were anti-semites? Read Ray Conlogue 's "Impossible nation" on the history of the reverse blood libel...
BTW, found the college class with 4 french students in Alberta?